Navigate:

Opinion Contributor

Newt Gingrich is no Saul Alinsky

Saul Alinsky had no use for bullies like Newt Gingrich, the author writes. | AP Photo

By NICHOLAS VON HOFFMAN | 1/24/12 1:42 AM EST

If Saul Alinsky weren’t already dead, he’d die to get a piece of Newt Gingrich. The one kind of man Alinsky had no use for was a bully.

The Dough Boy of GOP reaction has apparently decided he can win it all by making Alinsky the central figure of the 2012 campaign. Every time Gingrich opens his mouth, out comes pronunciamenti like “the centerpiece of this campaign…is American exceptionalism versus the radicalism of Saul Alinsky.” (Fox Nation 1/21/12) or “Saul Alinsky radicalism is at the heart of Obama.” (CNN 1/22/12)

Text Size

-

+

reset

If this were not silly enough, harken to Rudy Giuliani on the TV upbraiding Gingrich for acting like Alinsky: “What the hell are you doing, Newt? I expect this from Saul Alinsky. This is what Saul Alinsky taught Barack Obama.”

Since President Barack Obama was 11 years old when Alinsky died, what, if anything, he learned from Alinsky, the inventor of community organizing, is not known. Given some moves the president has made in office, it’s not immediately apparent that Alinsky’s political genius rubbed off on him.

Were he around today, Alinsky, the old street fighter who died in 1972, would be delighted with all this. He was at his best when the empty suits and stuffed shirts trained their guns on him. I say that having known Alinsky for almost 20 years, worked for him for 10 of them and watched him in action countless times.

On a debate stage he would take the former speaker with ease because you could not bully Alinsky into the embarrassed mumbling to which Gingrich’s GOP rivals have been reduced. It would be no contest — for Alinsky was a witty man who could have easily ridiculed Mr. Roly-Poly’s claims of being the all-knowing historian.

Alinsky called himself a radical not because he was a devotee of an economic or political doctrine. He didn’t use the abstract terms that Gingrich uses, like capitalism, free market or socialism. Radical to Alinsky meant tough, smart, practical, persevering, fearless.

He contrasted that to the non-radicals, the softies, the pushovers, the liberals and the conservatives. None of whom you could count on in a knife fight.

Readers' Comments (38)

Of course, Gingrich's complete misreading of Alinsky is the product of that other master historian -- Glenn Beck, a paranoid lunatic who sees an imminent commie/Islamic/Homosexual Menace takeover around every corner.

If you want to measure how ridiculous Newt Gingrich really is, consider the low-lifes he steals his talking points from.

Make no mistake, Gingrich was a lobbyist who benefited immensely as a result of assuming the speakership. His marital affairs are well documented and speak more to his character than the 30 second ads his SuperPAC puts out (that of course, he doesn't coordinate with).

Make no mistake, Gingrich is a crook who will sell his Country to the highest bidder.

Saul Alinsky died in 1972. I have never heard of him until Newt mentioned him. No one in Chicago's liberal elite hipsters follow him, and Obama was like 11, when he was popular for 15 minutes. I guess being near Athens, Georgia, where only one band of note ever came out, the Georgians are hanging on to a myth of what they believe a Chicago Liberal to be.

Here it is:

We believe in Milton Friedman's free markets, however, with Jesse white's Rules of the Road.

We believe in the charity of Jane Adams and Hull House

We believe that every one has value, and a contribution whether female black, or white...

We were the home of Martin Luther King, and the Black Pathers. Of the Nation of Islam, and the Labor Movement of Upton Sinclair. For a historian, you have not gotten too far from the Civil War, one that for the residents of Chicago, did not matter all too much. We still kept trading furs with Canada, and running guns both east, west and maybe even a little south.

This entire article is a classic Alinsky tactic. You can not win people over to leftwing ideology with your true beliefs, so just call them names like Bully. This article is written from the standpoint that it is assumed that Gingrich is a bully. Yet many of us see the reality of a leftwing media who is trying to manipulate America to their viewpoint. Could it just as easily be said that that is a very sneaky and insiious form of bullying, because it has such a hidden agenda???

Thank you Mr. Von Hoffman for this article! Be prepared, though, the right-wing commenters here are sure to howl in protest at the mere mention of the most hated Saul Alinsky (though very few if any of them actually know a thing about the man).

Alinsky's work with in the Back of the Yards neighborhoods in Chicago during the Depression and onwards is an important piece of the history of social work, and grassroots political movements. Before Alinsky, the field of social work followed the Jane Addams/Hull House and "Scientific Charity" models that viewed the poor as wayward souls in need of saving by benevolent upper class ladies. "Community organizing" as it came to be called later, was Saul Alinsky's tradition of working WITH the people in poor neighborhoods to create their OWN solutions and empower THEMSELVES to improve their lot in life. It was called "radical" because at that time it WAS a radical departure from the prevailing orthodoxy of social welfare that viewed the problems of the poor as products of moral failures. This is not to say that the settlement house movement was entirely paternalistic and does not shape social work today, but Alinsky's focus on organizing people from the ground up STILL represents a very different tradition.

Yes, Saul Alinsky was a leftist (although he eschewed partisan politics, being generally skeptical of politicians), but keep in mind he WAS working in one of the poorest areas of Chicago during the Depression (anyone read "the Jungle?") and he was hardly alone in that. It's completely absurd to view the politics of the past through the lens of politics today, yet people do it all the time.

Perhaps the greatest misreading of Saul Alinsky's work stems from "Rules for Radicals." The book was written in an attempt to codify Alinsky's community organizing model for future organizers of grassroots movements to learn from. As Von Hoffman stated in his article, the term "radical," in Alinsky's world, meant a person who was not satisfied with piecemeal approaches to social change - someone who would take the fight TO the powerful instead of waiting to react to the world around them. Saul Alinsky WAS tough, no doubt, but when you're David - going up against Goliath (meat packing barrons in Chicago, for example) - how to you expect to affect change any other way? The poor, primarily immigrant factory workers in the Back of the Yards did not have money or political influence to improve their conditions - all they had was people power, and that is what Alinsky's model is all about.

I challenge anyone who has adopted the Saul-Alinsky-as-Lefty-Boogeyman view (I'm putting money on the fact that no one who thinks that had ever heard of the man until Glenn Beck and others started conspiracy-mongering about his legacy) to read Von Hoffman's biography... You don't have to be a liberal to appreciate the work that was done in the context of the times.

We see how the leftwing media doubles and triples down in their repudiation of conservatives who call them out for their leftwing bias. Gingrich is called a bully for pointing out their bias and embarassing them in front of a national audience. They will use Klan like tactics now to gang up on Gingrich and repudiate him for this terrible sin of pointing out their bias. Expect to see similar articles repudiating Gingrich in other media as the leftwing media parrot each other. And yet they continue to keep this Klan like white sheet of objectivity over their heads. The leftwing media has become the true unjustice that is destroying all that made this country great. Somehow they need to be held accountable for their actions. Maybe we need to impose the fairness doctrine on the leftwing media. Meanwhile the kid gloves treatment of Obama and his cohorts continues as he slowly sinks free enterprise and swells the federal government. Does anyone think he would have been elected if the same magnifiying glass was put on him or his record?

In August 1967 the FBI created its Rabble Rouser Index (later known as Agitator Index) and Alinsky was added to it.

The Index was initially designed to capture background information on individuals “who have demonstrated by their actions and speeches that they have a propensity for fomenting racial disorder.” [FBI SAC Letter 67-47].

A subsequent SAC Letter (67-70) stated:

“A rabble rouser is defined as a person who tries to arouse people to violent action by appealing to their emotions, prejudices, etc.; a demagogue. You will note that under prior criteria the Rabble Rouser Index served as an index only for individuals of national prominence with particular consideration given to those who travel extensively and was limited to those fomenting racial disorder. It is the intent of this expanded criteria to have within each division as well as nationwide an index of agitators of all types whose activities have a bearing on the national security. This would include, for example, black nationalists, white supremacists, Puerto Rican nationalists, anti-Vietnam demonstration leaders, and other extremists.” …

The Bureau’s concerns about Alinsky were summarized in 2 memos in 1972, from which I quote excerpts below.

The first FBI memo pertains to a Jack Anderson column about Alinsky published in The Washington Post on June 24, 1972:

“Review of Bureau files reveals Alinsky has not been the subject of any surveillance or active security investigation by the FBI. Alinsky was the subject of discreet, preliminary inquiry by Bureau in 1944 due to his being considered as possible juvenile delinquency lecturer for FBI National Academy. He was not recommended for this position as information developed that his wife was associated with a communist group, to wit, the Jackson Park branch of American League For Peace and Democracy. (This group has been designated per Executive Order 10450). Bureau files reveal Saul David Alinsky, white male, born 1/30/09, of Chicago, Illinois was Executive Director of Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF), established in 1940, to organize and train indigenous personnel for community organizations. He was also active in activity concerning poverty-type problems in the U.S. In connection with his activities, he associated with communists, communist front groups, and extremists.”

“Information concerning these latter associations came to the Bureau’s attention through sources providing coverage of the specific subversives or extremists with whom Alinsky had association. Examples of these associations include: his appearance as speaker at Socialist Workers Party (SWP) meeting, Chicago, 2/10/56, (SWP has been designated pursuant to EO 10450); his active support of SWP functionary James Kutcher who was fired in 1959 from Veterans Administration due to subversive membership; his giving main speech at Foster Club meeting of Southeast Section of Communist Party (CP), held at Chicago 3/61; his meeting with black extremist Stokely Carmichael in Chicago 1/67, reportedly to assist Carmichael in organizing in ghetto areas; and his affiliation with poverty-type programs such as the Woodlawn Organization in Chicago, which employed youth-gang leaders who were involved in violence.”

A second FBI memo dated 7/26/72 states:

“Alinsky has developed approximately 44 social action organizations in various cities throughout the country and has furnished organizing tools as well as organizers for many communities that have asked for them through his work with the IAF…Alinsky had called for the use of such methods as rent strikes, sit-ins, and pickets to gain his objectives and the results obtained have been the subject of considerable controversy. Alinsky has been referred to as a radical but not as a revolutionist. He reportedly has had a long association with communists in attending affairs sponsored by communist front groups in the Chicago area in the 1940?s and early 1950?s. A Chicago Police Department source advised on 1-10-68 that Alinsky has characterized himself as a ‘professional radical’ and has stated: ‘The only way to upset the power structure in the community is to goad them, confuse them, irritate them and most of all, make them live by their own laws; if you make them live by their own laws, you will destroy them.’ He also referred to himself as an ‘agitator who loves to rub raw the sores of discontent’."

Wake up radicals. Its the leftwing media who are manipulating you and the big government who is manipulating you who now have alll the power. They want to shift the blame to business, but business is very accountable. businesses go out of business if they do not produce what the public wants. Government and the big media are largely unaccountable. They never go of business. Worse yet is big government ideology and the elitest leftwing media are working in cahoots.

This is what's called an "opinion" piece people, the author is CLEARLY not trying to be "objective," that's what editorial writing is, sheesh.

Being a "bully" is not a function of political ideology, it is part of a person's personality regardless of their beliefs. Out of all the R's on the debate stage, Gingrich is the only one who comes across as a bully - not because of his "ideas," but because he blatantly uses intimidation to cow whoever he goes after.

Other than providing yet another example of Politico's left wing bias, this article is useless. I mean, seriously, why should I care that an obvious left wing nut thinks another left wing nut is ,like, totally gonna beat the other guys butt!

Reading this childish taunt is like watching a couple of 10 year olds arguing over who's tougher...Spiderman or the Lantern!

And calling Newt fat....what a class act. What's amazing is that this ******* doesn;t even realize his criticisms of Newt apply equally to the arrogant ***** in the WH. Idiot.

This column is just one bloviating attack on Newt, whom I despise, but exactly how would Mr. Alinsky tear him down? You just go on praising his character in an endless rant but refuse to give specifics. Color me unimpressed.

As for Alinsky, if you worked with him for so many years then how come nobody knows who you are and the fact that you have zero accomplishments?

Another thing to consider about Alinsky: nobody talks about him except right-wingers who have created this useful ghost to bash whenever someone even considers a sliver of social justice. For all his gospel of 'pragmatic radicalism', he has failed and is viewed as an extreme leftwinger just like Bill Ayers.

The irony of Alinsky is that his fate became exactly what he strived to avoid his whole life: being defined as a leftwing nutjob who is dangerous and radical and untrustworthy. His very name has become so toxic, despite the fact that he was mostly unsuccessful in his life(it wasn't hard being who he was in the 60s and early 70s, considering that the Zeitgeist was what it was).

It is becoming more and more apperent that some of you re-bags really hang your entire belief system on the dribble that your heroes on fox news, rush and the other hateful media outlets spew out! You are now going to be refered to as the party of the Stepford wives!

The best thing about Newt talking about Saul Alinsky is that the college kids of today will go back to reading and studying him. I just donated a copy of "rules for radicals" to my local small town library....and it has been checked out 7 times already. And I know the kids who have been reading it are knocked by him because I talked to a couple of them that live on my street, and they plan to try to bring the book to their school library.